What does this say about men in general?

[DuckiesDarling]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/beauty/8891462/Men-prefer-beautiful-champions



What do you guys think? Does looks really matter more than sheer talent? Overall, I don't think most of the bisexual men are that shallow so please prove me right in your responses.

[tenni]

Overall, it is the talent that permits female athletes win. Sharapova gained more endorsements though without winning a lot of tournaments. There was a reason for that and it is her beauty. Endorsements are controlled by social values and probability for the company to make sales.


“I don't think most of the bisexual men are that shallow so please prove me right in your responses.”


Why should bisexual men be expected to behave more like you want us to behave than heteromen? We are not shallow.... just guys. Men are visual and look more so at attractive women. We are not gay remember. ;) I'm sure that this winner can be packaged to look attractive. The Boyle woman was...lol

[Long Duck Dong]

it says that I am either not human, that I do not think with my dick or that I am not seeing things in terms of looks equals talent......

I remember of lass that used to be a part of the martial arts class that I was helping to teach, she was not that attractive by way of looks but she had a warm smile and a fantastic personality.. I always looked for her when I arrived at the dojo, just so I could smile at her and get one in return......
she used to * hide * at the back of the class and was hard to see at times, but dammed if that girl was not a legend in the making when it came to martial arts and very quickly she was offered the chance to step up to the advanced class, the elite students that has a natural skill with martial arts.... and watching her doing kata, was breath taking....

when she went for the north island champs, she excelled, even the judges were in awe..... and I swear that she glowed on that stage as they acknowledged her skill with bo staff, nunchaku and kata...... the day she got her black belt, I reckon she glowed like the sun.....

she later committed suicide and I have never forgiven the assholes behind it, that launched a hate campaign against her cos they did not like the idea that they were outdone by a ugly lesbian etc etc etc.....I was the one that * awarded * her 3rd dan black belt at her funeral and she never knew that one of the judges had referred to her as a f'ing horse faced les before she put on a performance that was beyond words.....

there is often talk about how ugly people have to work harder to get to the same places as people born with genetically blessed looks and bodies... god knows that I am not a supermodel... and based on what I have seen with some people, its true..... but I see people in terms of what they do, not what they look like cos I really know that the person with a voice like a angel, may not be a angel to look at....... IE susan boyle... and no shes not ugly to me, she has a cheeky smile and gentle nature that stands out.......

my sister was a model cos of her looks and it was her personality that made my sister loved by so many but.... sadly her sammich making talents suck... such a shame lol.. its so hard to find a gorgeous sammich maker... lol.............

good on the lass for her tennis skills and playing so well, shes set a standard of ball play that many of her critics will never reach lol


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJO3ROT-A4E

[sailorashore]

She's a champion, and he's an insensitive jerk. And for the record, I've heard many of my dearest women friends make terribly sexist remarks about pretty young men. But as I said, she's a champion--she's probably a fantastic lover with a partner who appreciates her and takes his/her time to show it, and that makes her smokin' HOT, in my book.

[DuckiesDarling]

She's a champion, and he's an insensitive jerk. And for the record, I've heard many of my dearest women friends make terribly sexist remarks about pretty young men. But as I said, she's a champion--she's probably a fantastic lover with a partner who appreciates her and takes his/her time to show it, and that makes her smokin' HOT, in my book.

I pretty much think she's the tennis champ and that is what should be lauded about her. The comments I read in the article were just sexist. It doesn't matter what she looks like the fact is she played tennis better than any other female at that time. Sadly, there are females who do the same about nice looking guys in athletics. I'm more inclined to talk about the shooting abilty or the nice assist of the point guard rather than how cute their ass is in those shorts. But I do think that overall bisexual men seem to have a better understanding about the value of a person rather than the looks of a person.

[tenni]

"But I do think that overall bisexual men seem to have a better understanding about the value of a person rather than the looks of a person."

Unless scientific evidence can be presented, I would think that the above statement is sexist. Whenever someone refers to "men in general" or women in general, they are writing with a sexist perspective. It is lovely to think that somehow bisexual men are empowered with more humane and empathetic than gay or hetero men. Although it may be lovely to think that bisexual men have this magic ability to overlook physical beauty, it seems sexist to apply it to ALL bisexual men. It is like stating that gay men make wonderful decorators because they are gay. There is more evidence that that is true than stating ALL bisexual men have a better understanding about the value of a person rather than the looks of a person. The fellow who made the statement is a jerk but not all hetero men are such jerks when it comes to judging based on physical appearance. For all we know the guy may be bisexual or even gay?

Martina Navratilova, lesbian tennis star was no beauty queen but pictures show her with makeup or without. The reality is that she was respected for her talent but less corporate sponsorship endorsement. Yet, Martina is still talked about for her abilities and is quoted. The Williams sisters are recognized for their talent and do have some endorsements. Both sisters are rather big and not petite but their strength at serving is highly respected. Yet, when off the court both sisters can present themselves in an attractive way. One has her own fashion business. I don't think that people in general expect women tennis stars to be physical beauties but when it happens they do tend to get more endorsements. It is reality.

[Long Duck Dong]

Martina Navratilova, lesbian tennis star was no beauty queen but pictures show her with makeup or without. The reality is that she was respected for her talent but less corporate sponsorship endorsement. Yet, Martina is still talked about for her abilities and is quoted. The Williams sisters are recognized for their talent and do have some endorsements. Both sisters are rather big but their strength at serving is highly respected. I don't think that people in general expect women tennis stars to be physical beauties but when it happens they do tend to get more endorsements. It is reality.

navratilova was more worried about her activitism work with peta and other groups than corporate sponsorship and endorsements.... her association made her less than desirable to many companies as peta are a problematic activitism group.... she even acknowledged it herself that her beliefs were more important then corporate sponsorship

Sharapova went after endorsements when she suffered a injury that sidelined her and she wanted easy and simple endorsements that were easily furfilled as she wanted to return to the tennis circuit.... currently ranked 3rd in the world, she is one of the leading womans tennis players......

the venus sisters have done a lot of personal endorsement work and charity work but they are not interested in the * beauty queen * style endorsements, having stated that they are real people not barbie dolls......

that is reality, that is truth.... the majority of people that are sportspeople will never appear in full cover public endorsement advertising because they are not that sort of people... in the same way that some people will never be social butterflies but closet moths...

[tenni]

Serena Williams can present herself as "hot" as can Monica Seles(star who was stabbed in the 90's). Stefi Graff was highly respected as a player but I haven't seen a photo of her as hot as Serena Williams or Monica Seles). Serena has her own fashion line and is definitely interested in clothing and feminine beauty. This image is from her fashion web page. The image de emphasizes her large powerful shoulders and plays up a demure sexy feminine woman. 16945 16946

[bi4asplay]

To me the looks are what first gets my attention. That attention has to come before the talent can be known, or understood. We are all visual beings.

[Long Duck Dong]

I disagree on that aspect, as we are not all visual beings, there are those that are blind / visual impaired and then there are those that find the beauty in other forms, such as a singers voice on a radio...... the visual being aspect only truly applies when we can see somebody.. and its the visual aspect that can make or break the way a person can percieve another person that they have never seen before, but they have heard them talk / laugh / sing etc......

we can perceive a warmth, friendliness and connection to a person online in a chat room that we can percieve to look according to the way we think a person would look yet walk pass them in the street because they are strangers that have no semblance to the way we think they would look...

lol as one of my friends said, some of the most beautiful ladies he knows, hes never met..... and when asked how that works, he says that honestly his imagination is a wonderful thing, he can fantasy about his lady friends all night long.... and when asked about how he would deal with it if he did see that his lady friends were real people and he could get closer to them, he answers that he would take the staples out of their navels and stick them on the wall so that way the pages didn't get stuck together.....

[Realist]

Funny, LDD!

I'm no intellectual and things often go over my head...like reasons some people get so emotional about issues that don't bother, excite, or stimulate me, in the least.

I know everyone has their own interests in things/people who attract them, but I don't feel a huge desire to try to convert anyone else to my own way of thinking. I gravitate toward those with similar opinions/interests and feel no desire to mingle with those I don't feel a connection with. I do not want to convert anyone to my way of thinking, but will give a personal comment, if asked for one.

My feelings are: Men are visual beings....probably more so than women. I have known women who are very visually influenced and might even fall in love with someone, without knowing who/that person really is. He/she could be the biggest asshole in the world, but she could still feel a powerful attraction.

But, I'd bet that men are much more likely to do the same thing.

I know I've felt shocking impulses from just seeing a voluptuous woman, or a guy, who exuded certain sensual characteristics that appeal to me. Knowing those impulses are superficial, does not lessen my desire to get to know them. However, on more than one occasion, if I got to speak to that person, the desire evaporated, immediately! Personalities, attitudes, and mutual interests, are things that tend to keep my ardor afloat.

Each of us have our own criteria that draws us to, or away from, others. There's no right, or wrong answer, for our own attractions..........but, it'd be more polite to not make detrimental comments about a person's looks, shape, or size...especially in the media, or where the subject might overhear. I'm no angel, but I do strive not to say, or write, anything that might hurt someone's feelings.

[tenni]

"I disagree on that aspect, as we are not all visual beings"

I think that being asexual has something to do with this perspective.

[Long Duck Dong]

"I disagree on that aspect, as we are not all visual beings"

I think that being asexual has something to do with this perspective.

could not resist it could you.... just had to find some way to try and devalue a persons opinion by trying to devalue them as a person....... you need to see a counsellor, tenni, your need to constantly devalue and demean people in this site is reaching epidemic proportions....

[Gearbox]

could not resist it could you.... just had to find some way to try and devalue a persons opinion by trying to devalue them as a person....... you need to see a counsellor, tenni, your need to constantly devalue and demean people in this site is reaching epidemic proportions....
Jezuz Lord above, your gf said much the same thing about bi's in this thread. Maybe SHE should see a damn good counselor? I mean - a REALLY fekin excellent one SAP!:rolleyes:

[DuckiesDarling]

Jezuz Lord above, your gf said much the same thing about bi's in this thread. Maybe SHE should see a damn good counselor? I mean - a REALLY fekin excellent one SAP!:rolleyes:

You need to retake reading comprehension. All I said was that overall I find bisexual men to be better, but thanks so much Gear for going out of your way to try and prove you aren't better at all.

[Gearbox]

You need to retake reading comprehension. All I said was that overall I find bisexual men to be better, but thanks so much Gear for going out of your way to try and prove you aren't better at all.
And you think/thought that bisexuals are better/less shallow than anybody else coz of perspective? Or what else?

[tenni]

http://www.bisexual.com/forum/images/styles/lifeElement/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Long Duck Dong http://www.bisexual.com/forum/images/styles/lifeElement/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.bisexual.com/forum/showthread.php?p=253735#post253735)
could not resist it could you.... just had to find some way to try and devalue a persons opinion by trying to devalue them as a person....... you need to see a counsellor, tenni, your need to constantly devalue and demean people in this site is reaching epidemic proportions....


Jezuz Lord above, your gf said much the same thing about bi's in this thread. Maybe SHE should see a damn good counselor? I mean - a REALLY fekin excellent one SAP!:rolleyes:
...............................
It is a matter of trying to figure our where LDD's ideas are based. It was to be expected that he would fly off the handle. Why? He feels persecuted and yet continues to make unusual statements without contexualizing them as if his thoughts are the norm. If he wants to deny that his asexuality doesn't colour how he perceive sex and relationships, then his concepts will be commented on.

There are reasons for his rather unusual perception about sex and emotional attachment. He seems to dismiss that his perspective is deviant from the norm for sexual men. Basically. he wrote that he does not use visual attractive cues like the vast majority of sexual men. Why? Asexuality is a logical point to reason for this. Bisexual men are no better or worse than hetero or gay men when it comes to using visual cues as to who attracts them. Not one sexual man has supported LDD in his "not use visual cues" to determine attraction position. Although most men would like to believe that they look beyond the visual cues and we do, the visual cues of attraction play a significant role in the initial contact. On the long term other factors come in to play but a tennis star knows when to put her make up on if she wants endorsements.

As far as to who needs counselling, play that victim card again dude. If it is not his asexuality what causes him to repeatedly make unorthodox statements about sex and relationships? It is not demeaning asexuality but acknowledging that asexuality as a partial explanation for his perspectives and in this case his denial that he uses visual cues to determine sexual attraction. Then again, asexuals do not have sexual attractions..nor do they write about sex.

[Long Duck Dong]

and the goon squad start......

the nature of visual attraction vs non visual attraction is well documented by scientists and science.... while people rely on visual attraction, its still fucking hard to be visually attracted to a voice on a radio... and blind people ( impaired to the point that facial recognition is impossible ) are also not able to see, ergo no visual attraction..... yeah attraction to a person can exist without visual attraction yet most people rely on visual means in regards to attraction.....

however, tenni wants to think that using sexuality and asexuality as a measure of thumb to define visual attraction, works,... something that is not supported by scientist, only by the ignorance of the goon squad and the need to *control and own * sexuality and who can be what....

the thread is about the remarks of a commentor in regards to a tennis player and how she was not really attractive enuf so she had to work harder to be anybody..... the goon squad are determined to prove that its the same for bisexuals and bisexuality by way of redefing the rules of attraction ( visual and none visual ) and who is able to be attracted to whom and by what methods.... failing that... they will just resort to the usual attack, devalue and demean a person and then blame their target for it......

how that makes me NOT the victim, is that others have had to deal with the same BS from the goon squad, including the bisexuals that have been pushed / driven from the site for having the wrong opinion, gender or attitude towards relationships.....

there was simply no need to bring asexual / asexuality into the mix as there is NO scientific evidence or documentation to support the understanding by the goon squad that there is a difference between visual and non visual attraction by sexual / non sexual attraction... its merely another thread thrashed by the goon squad, using pot shots at other people in the site......

attempts to use asexuality and the nature of asexuality in a redefined manner to disprove my statements about visual and non visual attraction would only result in the conclusion that the goon squad are trying to say that the commentator is judging the female not on her looks but on his interest of fucking her ...... as my remarks were not about sexual attraction but visual and non visual attraction..... hence why the reference to asexuality by the goon squad was based around their own need to rewrite the nature of attraction as a purely sexual one...... attempts to debate that would lead to the conclusion that they are admitting that they are only trying to rewrite the nature of my remarks into ones of a sexual nature, where as I never posted that......

my stance stands..... a voice can be beautiful even if the singer is not seen..... and a person doesn't need to be beautiful in looks to have a beautiful nature...... not all attraction to a person is visual, IE chatrooms......and a person can desire a body based around a pic that has no face..... yet a majority of people talk about a interest in the face MORE than the body, in this site, showing that while they may have a sexual interest in people, they perfer to have a visual attraction to a person as well, based on their statements and this is supported by science.......

some light reading for the goon squad about the nature of cohesive interactions between people on the internet

http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/martin.lea/papers/2007-EJ%20Lea%20Spears%20Watt%20Vis%20anon%20CMC%20%20E JSP.pdf

it is a PDF file but it actually finds very lil difference between the visual and anon groups interaction....

please try not to confuse that none sexual case study with sex, please.... and to quote tenni... take it to another thread if you want to discuss it.. this is somebody elses thread about a different subject so can the goon squad show some respect please......

[tenni]

1/ “and the goon squad start......”


Name calling. Violation of rule 2. Deal with the issue and not the person.
Why is it that you think that it is permissible for you to name call but not others...again?

If you don’t want your position to be challenged, stop posting nonsense and dribble as if it were expert information and back up with facts.


2/ Referring to blind people is not really relevant to your use or lack of use of visual cues. You are not blind.

Do you use visual cues to determine which women attract you?


3/ “the nature of visual attraction vs non visual attraction is well documented by scientists and science”


Prove it. You write vacuous statements without clarification or support.


When I googled the above sentence a quick check shows that they refer to physical visual attraction as well as physiological responses to being physically attracted to those visual cues. These responses such as increased heart rate are the consequence of the visual cues. They did mention phermones and that is a factor. Most people are not aware of phermones as they are not a specific odour. You would not be aware of phermones from a woman attracting you either ...probably.


4/ “there was simply no need to bring asexual / asexuality into the mix as there is NO scientific evidence or documention to support the understanding by the good squad that there is a difference between visual and non visual attraction by sexual / non sexual attraction... its merely another thread thrashed by the good squad, using pot shots at other people in the site......”


Lovely inarticulate run on sentence with 62 words of vague victim reference. If you edit your posts it would help.

Try again to explain why your asexuality does not make you react differently than sexual men who do use visual cues to become physically sexually attracted? You are the asexual stating (vaguely ) that you do not use visual cues to be physically sexually attracted.

btw Before this thread reaches a hundred posts, who is hotter to you? Serena or Monica? ;) Did you use visual cues? :bounce:

[Long Duck Dong]

1/ “and the goon squad start......”


Name calling. Violation of rule 2. Deal with the issue and not the person.
Why is it that you think that it is permissible for you to name call but not others...again?

If you don’t want your position to be challenged, stop posting nonsense and dribble as if it were expert information and back up with facts.


2/ Referring to blind people is not really relevant to your use or lack of use of visual cues. You are not blind.

Do you use visual cues to determine which women attract you?


3/ “the nature of visual attraction vs non visual attraction is well documented by scientists and science”


Prove it. You write vacuous statements without clarification or support.


When I googled the above sentence a quick check shows that they refer to physical visual attraction as well as physiological responses to being physically attracted to those visual cues. These responses such as increased heart rate are the consequence of the visual cues. They did mention phermones and that is a factor. Most people are not aware of phermones as they are not a specific odour. You would not be aware of phermones from a woman attracting you either ...probably.


4/ “there was simply no need to bring asexual / asexuality into the mix as there is NO scientific evidence or documention to support the understanding by the good squad that there is a difference between visual and non visual attraction by sexual / non sexual attraction... its merely another thread thrashed by the good squad, using pot shots at other people in the site......”


Lovely inarticulate run on sentence with 62 words of vague victim reference. If you edit your posts it would help.

Try again to explain why your asexuality does not make you react differently than sexual men who do use visual cues to become physically sexually attracted? You are the asexual stating (vaguely ) that you do not use visual cues to be physically sexually attracted.

btw Before this thread reaches a hundred posts, who is hotter to you? Serena or Monica? ;) Did you use visual cues? :bounce:




1 ) the goon squad is a group term..... the fact that you are reading it as a individual is merely your fault.....

2) blind people can not use visual cues.... my eyesight has nothing to do with their ability to find people attractive without visual cues....

3)starting with the link I posted in my post that you have not read ????

4) simple..... I am not talking about sexual attraction by way of visual means, you are.... and for that, you need another thread...... as for any discussion on asexuality, well, if you have not trolled the threads I once posted about asexuality, it would have come up...... so you only have yourself to blame for that.....

this is not a thread about asexuality, its somebody elses thread that you are trolling, can you please go start your own thread so you can have a go at me... and if I am not there in 5 days, start without me.....

who is hotter to me ? ... neither, they each have their own redeeming qualities and I do not see people in terms of just looks like the commentator did in the OP and that is what this thread is about.......

[tenni]

Opps!
Thanks I read that study. What I find is that we may not be discussing the same thing as you wrote. What are you referring to if not judging the tennis player by her physical attractiveness?(read sexual attractiveness) Yet in post 10 your posted "I disagree on that aspect, as we are not all visual beings"


The study examines social identity approach to attraction of group cohesiveness by revealing aspects of flexibility under different contexual conditions. It refers to social attraction as distinct from interpersonal attraction. Isn’t the article referring to interpersonal attraction of the female tennis player? ie sexual attraction?


2/ Name calling a group or an individual is still not quite appropriate according to rule 2. Are you ok if some of us begin to refer to the group of two as duckyfucks? ;)

[redngoldpride]

it is all B.S. what he said is just that HIS OPINiONS AND THOUGHTS I for one do not share them in any way in fact i think she is quite a beautiful thing so talented and dedicated not all men think as he does i have learned at a very early age to never ever judge someone by their looks size or lack of size if you never get to know somebody first only by what you see on the outside you may never meet some of the greatest people in the world not to mention a possible sexy hot uninhibited total lover as for me i do know that this is true i have met big , small , tall , short and some with missing limbs or other things that people would never ever accept to this i say that they are the ones that are not deserving of the time

[Long Duck Dong]

Opps!
Thanks I read that study. What I find is that we may not be discussing the same thing as you wrote. What are you referring to if not judging the tennis player by her physical attractiveness?(read sexual attractiveness) Yet in post 10 your posted "I disagree on that aspect, as we are not all visual beings"


The study examines social identity approach to attraction of group cohesiveness by revealing aspects of flexibility under different contexual conditions. It refers to social attraction as distinct from interpersonal attraction. Isn’t the article referring to interpersonal attraction of the female tennis player? ie sexual attraction?


2/ Name calling a group or an individual is still not quite appropriate according to rule 2. Are you ok if some of us begin to refer to the group of two as duckyfucks? ;)



its very possible for people to look at another person and say they are attractive looks wise but shes not really our type so we are not sexually interested or people to say nice body, I could make love to that body all night long... with the light out cos she is not that attractive.... I am taking that into consideration when I talk about attractiveness and NOT limiting it to sexual attraction in the way that you are

I made the remark about how we are not all visual beings cos I was including the people that have limited / impaired / no sight as they * see * things in terms of attraction too and lacking the ability to see a person, means that their understanding of attraction differs from people that base attractiveness on looks.... and the interesting aspect is many people find their partner to be attractive by more than just looks alone yet if they were to close their eyes, many people could not describe how their partner looks but blind people can describe their partners very well.....

if you can find anywhere in the article that the commentator is talking about how he finds her sexually attractive and wants to fuck her, please copy and paste it..... the commentator was referring to how he perceived the tennis player as not attractive and so he was seeing her as somebody that needed to work harder to get some where....and how he perceived her father as saying that she will not be a looker so she has to be a player ?? does that sound like the father was saying that she was not attractive enuf to fuck her way to a top ranking so she would have to play her way to the top... or that the father was saying that you are going to have to prove yourself where it counts because others used their looks to get to where they are today.........

2) as I have posted to fran in another thread goon squad is a term I use for people that try to rewrite the rules and definitions of society and other standings to suit themselves in order to go after and flame other people...... and the constant targeting of me, my partner, our sexuality, relationship and choices is something that have been going on for a few years, you have even been banned for it in the past..... so its a term I use to refer to a group of people, not a name I am applying to individual people...
question: What Is 'Flaming'?
Answer: 'Flaming', or 'to flame', means to attack someone verbally online. Flaming entails insults, bigotry, name-calling, or any outright hostility directed at a specific person.

so here is my response.... drews site, drews rules, drews ruling.... you can call people what you want but you only have yourself to blame if you get banned again for going after me and DD

[tenni]

Goon Squad
This is just the typical swirling justification of your behaviour. You violate the rule 2 about flame the idea and not the person. You don’t have the courage(balls) to identify who you consider to be in this “goon squad”. It seems that anyone who disagrees with you is in this goon squad. Typical illogical LDD BS.


“I made the remark about how we are not all visual beings cos I was including the people that have limited / impaired / no sight as they * see * things in terms of attraction too and lacking the ability to see a person, means that their.....”


This is off topic and irrelevant as neither you nor others on this site are blind. Round and round in diatribe.


Ok...so as an asexual you do not deal with attractiveness in the same manner as sexual beings. There is no subtle undertone of sexual tension for you that sexual beings have. There are no thoughts of "I'd do her" even if you know that you do not have a chance to have sex with an attractive woman. It is obvious that you don’t get “it.” but also deny your limitations in discussions involving sex attraction. You can not accept that you are simply not on the same planet sexually as most men.

If you follow your typical behaviour, you will come back with an attempt to rationalize your behaviour and thought processes. No further comment from me will follow. Have a good day sir.

[Long Duck Dong]

added to my ignore list...... there is no point in trying to be considerate and reasonable with you.......

[Gearbox]

Answer: 'Flaming', or 'to flame', means to attack someone verbally online. Flaming entails insults, bigotry, name-calling, or any outright hostility directed at a specific person.
Mentioning your asexuality is not flaming, attacking, bigoted or in any ANY way hostile!

Playing the victim so you can be all those things yourself IS! You have derailed yet another thread by throwing a drama fit about NOTHING, just so you can hurl abuse at Tenni and others again!
If you really think being called asexual is degrading or insulting, try NOT making threads about how you ARE asexual, and how it DOES effect you!

[Long Duck Dong]

Mentioning your asexuality is not flaming, attacking, bigoted or in any ANY way hostile!

Playing the victim so you can be all those things yourself IS! You have derailed yet another thread by throwing a drama fit about NOTHING, just so you can hurl abuse at Tenni and others again!
If you really think being called asexual is degrading or insulting, try NOT making threads about how you ARE asexual, and how it DOES effect you!


your defense of your buddy, tenni is admirable but your ignorance is not surprising cos of the fact that its often you that are tag teaming with him when it comes to the trolling of me and my partner...... hell most of the threads that have involved flaming and trolling of me, seem to involve the same two people each time.... you and tenni...... and who started posting about asexuality in the thread ??? tenni.... whats the thread about ? a commentors remarks about a female competitors looks.... absolute nothing to do with the subject matter as all........who is in here now, blaming me and making out that its all me... YOU.....

tenni was asked repeatedly to take his subject matter to another thread ( something that tenni often tells others to do ) and to stick to the subject matter ( another of tenni's fav things that he likes to tell others to do ), out of respect for the people that wanted to talk in the thread without tenni turning it into a thread about his issues with LDD and LDDs sexuality.....

added to the ignore list...... I am tired of dealing with the sites trolls that Drew has not banned yet

[darkeyes]

2) as I have posted to fran in another thread goon squad is a term I use for people that try to rewrite the rules and definitions of society and other standings to suit themselves in order to go after and flame other people...... and the constant targeting of me, my partner, our sexuality, relationship and choices is something that have been going on for a few years, you have even been banned for it in the past..... so its a term I use to refer to a group of people, not a name I am applying to individual people...

Actually u didn't.. if I remember correctly you stopped at society... that there was further discussion I don't deny but I have always denied that as such I have ever gone after u or darlin' darlin' at the personal level... yet apparently I am a Goon which I don't mind being called but people in glass houses as it were... tinkling glass cuts both ways... by ur own definition, Duckie.. u r a Goon yasel... so b a lickle more careful bout wotya say...;) Tomatoes wich put themselves on the grill get roasted cos tomatoes are very tender things and cant take much heat....:)

..as to the original post.. Inverdale is a sexist areshole and shud at least be disciplined by the beeb.. his comments were insenstive, sexist and unpleasant.. that he holds such views he has that right.. but no commentator who works for a public broadcaster should utter such sexist rubbish on air while doing his job... it was demeaning, insulting and mysoginistic... some say he should be sacked.. should he? No.. not on this occasion... no 1 should be sacked for a single transgression while doing his job... should it become a habit? Then he has started a whole new ball game...

Nothing to do with the Ladies Singles but Andy Murray's winning the men's was brill.. not cos he is Scottish of British and no riton has won the championship for over 3/4 of a century...I dont care about his nationality... but because of his recovery from the tragedy of the Dunblane massacre when he and his brother sheltered terrified under a desk as Thomas Hamilton slaughtered so many of his friends and schoolmates... Dunblane has been in mourning ever since and his victory has helped heal a deep wound which the whole town has endured for 16 years... no longer do they feel themselves the town which suffered an awful slaughter of its children.. now they feel themselves belonging to the home town of Andy Murray.. Wimbledon Champion.. I loathe tennis... but I do admire resilience and overcoming against odds...

Much better to talk of the positives in a championship victory rather than the negatives... well done to both champions... wtf cares whatya look like? its wotya do that matters...

[DuckiesDarling]

Much better to talk of the positives in a championship victory rather than the negatives... well done to both champions... wtf cares whatya look like? its wotya do that matters...

That, was the point of the thread, Fran.

[Gearbox]

your defense of your buddy, tenni is admirable but your ignorance is not surprising cos of the fact that its often you that are tag teaming with him when it comes to the trolling of me and my partner...... hell most of the threads that have involved flaming and trolling of me, seem to involve the same two people each time.... you and tenni...... and who started posting about asexuality in the thread ??? tenni.... whats the thread about ? a commentors remarks about a female competitors looks.... absolute nothing to do with the subject matter as all........who is in here now, blaming me and making out that its all me... YOU.....

tenni was asked repeatedly to take his subject matter to another thread ( something that tenni often tells others to do ) and to stick to the subject matter ( another of tenni's fav things that he likes to tell others to do ), out of respect for the people that wanted to talk in the thread without tenni turning it into a thread about his issues with LDD and LDDs sexuality.....

added to the ignore list...... I am tired of dealing with the sites trolls that Drew has not banned yet
Like it or not, your asexuality can be mentioned by ANYBODY here despite how many bitch fits you and your gf have. Tenni brought it up in context of attraction, which IS to do with the threads subject. Tenni was on the RIGHT thread discussing visual stimuli with an ASEXUALAL FFS!
As for tag teaming you (in your dreams!lol) it's YOU who persistently chastise a group of people here coz they don't swallow your BS and will point it out to you. It's a damn shame you don't have the maturity to discuss instead of cry victim, lie and hide behind guises.

Your trolling of the site doesn't go unnoticed by the majority here, so please don't underestimate people. Most are not gullible, not blind, nor illiterate and have better memories than yours.
I'd be delighted to be on your ignore list, just like many love you in theirs.:bowdown:

[tenni]

Coming back to the thread topic.
" I could make love to that body all night long... with the light out cos she is not that attractive..."

I don't think that I would think this way at all. A person's body is part of what attracts me to their physical self. Before you get anywhere near getting naked, you will have made a decision as to whether you are attracted to them. I suppose if a guy was "hard up" for sex, he might be interested in having sex with someone that does not attract him (not making love cuz that requires something more intense). This is not what I would consider a first reaction though. It is kind of a strange way to look at physical attraction.

Gear
Don't you think that posters who announce publicly that they are blocking someone are doing that for dramatic impact? Does that make them drama queens?..lol If you are going to block someone, no announcement needs to be made.

[Long Duck Dong]

Actually u didn't.. if I remember correctly you stopped at society... that there was further discussion I don't deny but I have always denied that as such I have ever gone after u or darlin' darlin' at the personal level... yet apparently I am a Goon which I don't mind being called but people in glass houses as it were... tinkling glass cuts both ways... by ur own definition, Duckie.. u r a Goon yasel... so b a lickle more careful bout wotya say...;) Tomatoes wich put themselves on the grill get roasted cos tomatoes are very tender things and cant take much heat....:)

..as to the original post.. Inverdale is a sexist areshole and shud at least be disciplined by the beeb.. his comments were insenstive, sexist and unpleasant.. that he holds such views he has that right.. but no commentator who works for a public broadcaster should utter such sexist rubbish on air while doing his job... it was demeaning, insulting and mysoginistic... some say he should be sacked.. should he? No.. not on this occasion... no 1 should be sacked for a single transgression while doing his job... should it become a habit? Then he has started a whole new ball game...

Nothing to do with the Ladies Singles but Andy Murray's winning the men's was brill.. not cos he is Scottish of British and no riton has won the championship for over 3/4 of a century...I dont care about his nationality... but because of his recovery from the tragedy of the Dunblane massacre when he and his brother sheltered terrified under a desk as Thomas Hamilton slaughtered so many of his friends and schoolmates... Dunblane has been in mourning ever since and his victory has helped heal a deep wound which the whole town has endured for 16 years... no longer do they feel themselves the town which suffered an awful slaughter of its children.. now they feel themselves belonging to the home town of Andy Murray.. Wimbledon Champion.. I loathe tennis... but I do admire resilience and overcoming against odds...

Much better to talk of the positives in a championship victory rather than the negatives... well done to both champions... wtf cares whatya look like? its wotya do that matters...

lol I do not use the term goon as a individual reference as its a insulting term that implies that somebody is retarded ( I use retarded in the clinical sense as meaning of impaired intuitive and cognitive abilities ) .... and as such I do not refer to people as goons.... and if you have perceived that it was directed at you personally, I do apologize, it was not meant as a personal label or term.......

and to that end.... I would love to quote your last statement as I fully agree....

[darkeyes]

At risk of sounding silly and even petty.. all I can say is u may refer to goon squad as a group .. but u do make it quite clear that several individuals are plainly considered goons... so lickle disengenuous.. and no need to apologise to me, Duckie... have been called much worse and shall be again no doubt... is cool.. am on me hols and don't care wot ne1 calls me... and feeling ver well disposed to the world:impleased...

..but on much the same theme as the thread but bit more generalised...http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/09/wimbledon-sexism-women-face-players-girlfriends

[Laylo]

..but on much the same theme as the thread but bit more generalised...http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/09/wimbledon-sexism-women-face-players-girlfriends

ha. i noticed that myself. It is a bit weird, especially as we don't fawn over the female players partners. Gotta be some gay or bi players about. Wonder what they'll do then....

[DuckiesDarling]

ha. i noticed that myself. It is a bit weird, especially as we don't fawn over the female players partners. Gotta be some gay or bi players about. Wonder what they'll do then....

Sadly, probably still make stupid comments that have nothing to do with the talent of the individual who is their partner. I actually enjoy watching tennis, it's something that I got hooked on way back and came to really enjoy the spectacle of Wimbledon. Just the sheer power of watching an ace delighted me and raised it from something they did at country clubs to a real sport. I still can't get into cricket but I watched the Rugby World Cup with the same fascination. Didn't hear a comment about anything except how bloody Richie McCaw face got. So why is it that some sports seem more deserving of discussing talent? Why the focus on looks? Sure there are some attractive athletes but how did the come to our attention?? Not for their looks, for their prowess. Oscar De La Hoya won the gold medal at the Olympic Games and suddenly everyone was worried that he would lose his sexy face if he continued boxing. He went on to become a very successful boxer and retired with his good looks intact because of his skill at boxing. But I still maintain that athletes should be judged on talent or lack thereof, not the sexiness of the body or the tightness of the shorts. :2cents:

[Meliss]

I've always been most attracted to people who actually interact with me. A nice gal in a social context beats a dozen movie starlets who are unapproachable. I am and have always been a breeder mentality, ie attracted to vibrant health and vitality. That being said I prefer body types and probably facial features a bit similar to mine but a little more fem than myself. Luck of the draw is always important too. I think people choose from what is available to them rather than seek the unobtainable.

[12voltman59]

It doesn't surprise me that the announcer said those things---far too many men---are shallow and think that physical appearance is the most important thing---whether their "objects of desire" are men, women or both.

They got to have some ideal of perfection, boobs that are big or not--or cocks that are huge--things of that nature.

[void()]

Space blank left, response unsure is.